On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 1:25 AM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On May 19, 2011, at 17:49 , Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:11 AM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On May 14, 2011, at 19:06 , Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If we want to have it additionally as a separate track type (@kind), I
>>>> would almost suggest to just call it "speech", because that's what it
>>>> is according to the DVB spec: the speech-only provided as separate
>>>> data with a possibility to increase its gain independently from the
>>>> other channels.
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually, since the media type of the track already tells us it is audio, I'd prefer just "clean"...
>>
>> What does "clean" mean to a Web developer or a user?
>
> Well, I would hope that these labels are, when possible, interpreted by the UA or matched to preferences, so they are not usually consider "user" labels. Â If they are, then we have an internationalization issue. Â For the web developer, they ought to mean what the documentation says they mean :-).
>
>> I still think
>> "speech" is more appropriate and easier to show in a UI. Unless there
>> are good arguments for "clean".
>
>
> I don't think we should (a) stray from normal industry parlance or (b) assume that it's always the speech that is the main program content.
I agree. Since we are talking about a technology that diverges from
what the industry labels as "clean audio", we should therefore not use
the same term.
Silvia.